[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 b6d6304: Comment on last change to define-der

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 b6d6304: Comment on last change to define-derived-mode
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 09:00:24 -0800 (PST)

> >> > and hard to read/manipulate.
> > Manipulate, maybe.  But no more than `let*' or `cond'.
> Actually, its true that it's harder to swap the first and second
> assignment in a multi-variable setq than a multivariable let*, don't
> you think?
> (setq a 1
>       b 2)
> vs
> (let* ((a 1)
>        (b 2))
>   ...)

OK, yes, slightly "harder".  Big deal.

As I said, I weigh in on the side of code readability, not ease
of writing.  Probably most (at least many) programmers do the

Either way, we are talking about _minor_ differences: in (a) writing
difficulty on the one hand and (b) reading difficulty on the other.

I favor the reader over the writer.  But I'm not writing/maintaining
this code.  I don't mind the minor editing chore for my own code,
but I can understand someone who just wants to get on with quickly
making changes and is not nit-picky about readability.

Personally, my impression is that (what I would call) overemphasis
on ease of writing is a trait of beginners, who can tend to think
that (1) they are writing only for themselves and (2) the code will
not live a long lifetime.  And then it can become a habit, so that
even experienced coders think/act like this.

> > Read?  Definitely not.  IMHO.
> Agreed: I use multi-variable setq a lot in my init files; I think it
> reads very nicely.

I expect that we are in the minority, perhaps even a tiny minority.
But I don't know that.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]